Talk:Federal Register

Citation Format

I recognize that this was changed previously in the article's existence, but the official citation format as defined by the Federal Register itself (and the office thereof) is "FR", not "Fed. Reg." While it's very frequently cited as "Fed. Reg." even in government publications (who ought to know better, but don't) the instructions in the Federal Register are quite specific. The Dragon of Life (talk) 20:25, 2 January 2009 (UTC)

"Fed. Reg." is the usual abbreviation in legal writing, as shown by the usage of the Supreme Court and other courts, law reviews, and the Bluebook. John M Baker (talk) 19:59, 7 January 2009 (UTC)

I wish I could find the opening instruction page to cite, but as it's boilerplate it's not reproduced on the electronic version. The Federal Register itself contains the executive branch's legal writing, and any reference to a previously-published document in those writings will come out "FR". My inclination, and motive behind the change here, would be to favor the style used by the Federal Register and the government branch it serves over those of the judicial. That being said, I don't believe there is an absolute legal requirement for the citations, which means that it relies on the style manual of the institution issuing the document in question. Maybe the most comprehensive solution is to indicate that it's most frequently referred to as "FR" in executive branch rules, NPRMs, and notices, and as "Fed. Reg." in judical and legal documents. The Dragon of Life (talk) 22:10, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Lead sentence

Hey, the first sentence says "routine publications". That's not really right! Dominic·t 15:46, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

National Archives staff collaboration

The U.S. National Archives (which includes the Office of the Federal Register) is currently engaged in a project to work together with Wikipedia in improving and expanding its content. As a long-time Wikipedian and NARA staff, I have been leading this effort; you can find much more information about myself and the project at our FAQ. As part of this effort, I have given instruction to Federal Register staff about Wikipedia culture, how to edit, and avoiding conflict of interest.

We've developed a plan where Federal Register staff will select a different article each month and focus their efforts on it. The National Archives and Records Administration and Office of the Federal Register articles will be off-limits for COI reasons, of course, but we are planning to focus on this article about the Federal Register publication this month. This message is just to give a heads-up to anyone who may be watching or later come across the article about what is going on. All editors participating will disclose who they are on their user pages first. We are going to be transparent, follow Wikipedia policies and norms as best we can, and engage in dialogue.

Having said that, I'd like to invite other Wikipedians to help us as we work on the article, or look over our work. Please join in! Thanks. Dominic·t 19:04, 6 February 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Federal Register. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110128020636/http://sunlightlabs.com/contests/appsforamerica2/ to http://www.sunlightlabs.com/contests/appsforamerica2/

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:30, 22 December 2017 (UTC)